安装 Steam
登录
|
语言
繁體中文（繁体中文）
日本語（日语）
한국어（韩语）
ไทย（泰语）
български（保加利亚语）
Čeština（捷克语）
Dansk（丹麦语）
Deutsch（德语）
English（英语）
Español-España（西班牙语 - 西班牙）
Español - Latinoamérica（西班牙语 - 拉丁美洲）
Ελληνικά（希腊语）
Français（法语）
Italiano（意大利语）
Bahasa Indonesia（印度尼西亚语）
Magyar（匈牙利语）
Nederlands（荷兰语）
Norsk（挪威语）
Polski（波兰语）
Português（葡萄牙语 - 葡萄牙）
Português-Brasil（葡萄牙语 - 巴西）
Română（罗马尼亚语）
Русский（俄语）
Suomi（芬兰语）
Svenska（瑞典语）
Türkçe（土耳其语）
Tiếng Việt（越南语）
Українська（乌克兰语）
报告翻译问题
rleduc123: Thanks! Glad to hear the scaling worked well. Distant doesn't apply to effects which move to any location, like the plane (or say Join the Caravan) so you were right to play it as a teleport. In scenario 4, those effects are separate - they don't only apply on the turn it enters play.
In Scenario 4 Frozen Cenotaph, the initial agenda says "Stygian enemies enter exhausted. The can't ready, etc." It's not clear upon reading if the second sentence is dependent on the first, i.e. that it applies to the turn in which they enter or generally. Maybe these should be switched in order: "Stygian enemies cannot ready etc.. Stygian enemies enter play exhausted." At least, I think that is what is intended.
Question - Confusion on my part in Scenario 3 Cold Heart. The 'distant' mechanic is well-explained and I get the multiple actions needed for a single move. However, which locations are considered connected? Am I missing a usual 'orthogonally adjacent locations are connected' statement in the campaign guide? There is a lot, so it would be easy for me to miss it!
Second Question - depending on the answer to the above, the cargo plane can go to 'any' location (except to the one prohibited for entry at start). I'm guessing that's how the investigators avoid the zepplin? I am playing true solo with one investigator, and so needed a little clarification to know whether the zepplin will always catch me at the enemy phase, or whether the plane can just out run it to the otherside of the map.
The first two scenarios scaled just great for a true solo player.
Ursula Downs, special Ally: "After a location is relvealed, if you are at that location..."
Does it mean "After you reveal a location..." or is it something a little different?
It's nothing special, but this format already exist in orginal AH LCG.
Re: Antarctic Supplies
The ability means to move supplies to or from the asset the ability is written on - this is how the Uses keyword works - the word specified in the Uses keyword (in this case, supplies), when referenced on the card, refers to the resource tokens on that card. You're right though that it would be better to specify this more clearly. I like your "between" as a way to elegantly word that.
Re: Ignivore
The Ignivore has the new Inexorable keyword. This means that it can't be defeated - if it would be defeated, instead you remove all damage from it, evade it, and the next time it would ready it doesn't ready.
City of the elder things, part A.
2 investigators, which means Stygian Ignivore had 10 health. About 5-6~ doom in on the first agenda we killed it.
Nowhere in setup, agenda, act or anything I read said something about the ignivore, so we thought we should discard in the encounter discard pile. About 1 turn later we reshufled that but the Ignivore ended up on top...and we realized it was a double-sided card. Very confused how to approach.
I don't mind explaining how we achieved that if I must, but thank Nataniel Cho and his fighting events, as well as Jaqueline with her clayvorance + ability to pull extra token for tests.
Antarctic Supplies read: Move any number of supplies to or from the Antarctic Supplies assets of other investigators at your location, and/or the Junker's JU-52 asset (if present).
The wording seems to imply you can't move supplies to/from ur supplies, but only to/from supplies of OTHER investigators (Aka the only valid move is another investigator and JU-52)
I doubt this is the intended mechanic since the scenario might be played solo...meaning this would be useless.
Perhaps: "Move any number of supplies to or from the Antarctic Supplies assets of investigators at your location, and/or the Junker's JU-52 asset (if present)."
Harlan Earnstone not having the ally keyword is a bug. Will fix, thanks. I'd better check them all just to be sure.
1- All trains cancelled objective: If the investigators as a group control (number of investigators) or more ally store assets, immediately advance.
Now, 2 players, so my first instinct was we needed 2 allies. But the thing is, usually even 1 (number of investigators) have the 1 in front of it (such as location cards). So I'm not sure if you forgot to put a number in front and it's actually, say, 2 (number of investigators).
And then -
First story asset we took control of was Harlan Earstone and I saw he has no Ally keyword. Is this an oversight? Or is he not supposed to count for the above objective?
The only significant change in 0.8.1 was increasing the doom threshold in scenario 3.
I've added a beta playtest version of Scenario 6 to the mod.
I really liked the first 4 scenarios, would hope this campaign gets finished :)
Super Complete Edition doesn't seem to have this issue, but I can't find anyone talking about how it's best to set things up.